Atheism is incompatible with science

[Horta]

8 minutes ago, Aquila King said:

 

 

 

Ah, so that's where he got it from...lol.

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

Jesus Christ  Go chase a kangaroo.

 

 

You can call me Psyche in here. 

[XenoFish]

7 hours ago, psyche101 said:

You can call me Psyche in here. 

Didn't the kangaroo's put out a restraining order against you already?

[psyche101]

On 5/4/2019 at 12:13 AM, XenoFish said:

Didn't the kangaroo's put out a restraining order against you already?

Not the one I ride to work

[psyche101]

On 5/3/2019 at 2:53 PM, psyche101 said:

This seems to happen a lot in theses discussions. Are you actually planning to return to this one? Usually you leave the discussion and then repeat your claims again in a couple of months. 

@Will Due

 

See........ 

 

[Will Due]

 

@psyche101

Isn't it time to feed your kangaroo?

 

 

[psyche101]

10 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

@psyche101

Isn't it time to feed your kangaroo?

We know what time it isn't

Its never time for you to finish a discussion on evolution and your creationist missing link nonsense

[Will Due]

25 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

We know what time it isn't

Its never time for you to finish a discussion on evolution and your creationist missing link nonsense

 

"species do not evolve gradually"

 

https://www.thoughtco.com/gradualism-vs-punctuated-equilibrium-1224811

 

 

Scientists are beginning to realize psyche, that the evidence indicates that species evolved from one to another, suddenly. Not gradually.

This is evidence that the evolution of species does not occur by chance (dumb luck). This is evidence that there is a controlling factor involved that's beyond "natural selection."

Another thing that's interesting is that some species remain stable for hundreds of millions of years and never evolve into a new species. To place a constant (natural selection) into the equation of the evolution of species, something in the theory doesn't add up. But fortunately, science is a work in progress.

 

 

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

"species do not evolve gradually"

 

https://www.thoughtco.com/gradualism-vs-punctuated-equilibrium-1224811

 

 

Scientists are beginning to realize psyche, that the evidence indicates that species evolved from one to another, suddenly. Not gradually.

This is evidence that the evolution of species does not occur by chance (dumb luck). This is evidence that there is a controlling factor involved that's beyond "natural selection."

Another thing that's interesting is that some species remain stable for hundreds of millions of years and never evolve into a new species. To place a constant (natural selection) into the equation of the evolution of species, something in the theory doesn't add up. But fortunately, science is a work in progress.

Both happen Will. Not one or the other. 

Punctuated Equilibrium is not a new theory. Scientists are not just beginning to realise its impact, its been proposed for around 40 or 50 years. 

It does not defy Darwinian evolution or show it as wrong. And it does not indicate that there is some other controlling force involved. 

Punctuated Equilibrium is the result of smaller isolated groups allowing evolution to hit the mainstream population. Because of the concentrated process, evolution can speed up in such instances. Like a species stranded by rising, or dropping waters quickly changing the local environment, its adapt or perish. Those who adapt survive. Species do evolve gradually. When punctuated equilibrium happens, it tends to be smaller isolated groups driven by a common mutation in the majority of the species. It is not how all evolution happens. Like I say, both happen, punctuated equilibrium is a rarer occurrence. 

Some species change little over time true. That's due to stable environments. Environment is what species adapt to, in order to fill niches. If an animal is suited to its niche well, it has no reason to evolve. In these cases, our platypus is one, we see little change in the animals as well as their environment. There is no natural selection to compete with as the niche is filled. Evolution occurs as is necessary, it's not a continuing action. 

Evolution is controlled by environmental factors and competition.

Are you aware of how the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe maps out its evolutionary process? 

 

 

[Will Due]

17 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Both happen

 

So you agree with me that there are two main arenas where evolution occurs.

One, where species evolve and adjust to their environment. Like with the giraffe and its long neck (and laryngeal nerve). These adjustments occuring gradually. Longer beaks. Shorter tails. But the species remains the same. There's lot's of evidence for this.

The other arena is where one species evolves into another. Here the fossil evidence suggests something more than environment and natural selection is involved. The evidence being the lack of evidence. (Which is the same reason some claim there's no God) The lack of transitional fossils between seperate, but related species.

And you're right, both happen. Which is a pretty good reason why atheism is incompatible with science. 

 

 

Edited May 15, 2019 by Will Due

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, Will Due said:

So you agree with me that there are two main arenas where evolution occurs.

No I don't agree with that. There is one process that can be sped up due to environmental factors. Punctuated equilibrium is Darwinian evolution. Both refers to the time frame not the process. 

Quote

One, where species evolve and adjust to their environment. Like with the giraffe and its long neck (and laryngeal nerve). These adjustments occuring gradually. Longer beaks. Shorter tails. But the species remains the same. There's lot's of evidence for this.

They don't remain the same  for instance, this is the giraffe lineage according to the fossil record 

Quote

The other arena is where one species evolves into another. Here the fossil evidence suggests something more than environment and natural selection is involved. The evidence being the lack of evidence. (Which is the same reason some claim there's no God) The lack of transitional fossils between seperate, but related species.

How do you come to that conclusion? There is nothing at all suggesting something more than environmental conditions. Again, punctuated equilibrium is just gradual evolution sped up. 

Dr. James G. Acker discussed a particular class of trilobites called Phacops that shows this exact pattern. The gradual change in the population is found in a single quarry in New Hampshire. The more general fossil finds show a gap in the Phacops line of great significance. Which means that in most locations, the fossils show a sudden appearance. But the fossils in one small place reveal that the trilobite species evolved there, and then migrated to the other places.

Transitional fossils are abundant for many species. The majority have evolved slowly with some exceptions to the rule forced by environmental conditions. There is no lack of evidence. The fossil record, vestigial remnants and DNA supports evolution entirely. 

Quote

And you're right, both happen. Which is a pretty good reason why atheism is incompatible with science. 

Both are the same thing affected by the environment. They are not two completely seperate processes. No animal in the fossil record just suddenly appears. 

As such your assertion that atheism is incompatible with science makes absolutely no sense at all. You have illustrated the very opposite of that with your inquiry. 

[Will Due]

 

@psyche101

I understand what the evidence is. I understand your point of view.

 

 

[psyche101]

26 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

@psyche101

I understand what the evidence is. I understand your point of view.

Do you now understand that punctuated equilibrium does not defy evolution and that it doesnt produce new species spontaneously? 

Creationists often misrepresent the facts to support a creationist point of view. It sounds like you have had a bad introduction to Punctuated Equilibrium. 

The peppered moth is a good example of modern fast paced evolution. 

[Rlyeh]

4 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

@psyche101

I understand what the evidence is. I understand your point of view.

What about objective evidence?

[Will Due]

4 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

What about objective evidence?

 

That's what I was referring to. 

 

 

[Rlyeh]

19 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

That's what I was referring to. 

 

You finally understand why your UB isn't objective evidence?

[Will Due]

4 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

You finally understand why your UB isn't objective evidence?

 

Oh that dog gone Urantia Book. 

 

 

[Habitat]

7 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Oh that dog gone Urantia Book. 

 

 

I saw a story on the TV tonight about this gentleman, who I was unaware of......

Sir George Hubert Wilkins MC & Bar (31 October 1888 – 30 November 1958) was an Australian polar explorer, ornithologist, pilot, soldier, geographer and photographer. He was awarded the Military Cross, when he assumed command of a group of American soldiers who had lost their officers during the Battle of the Hindenburg Line, and became the only official Australian photographer from any war to receive a combat medal. He narrowly failed in an attempt to be the first to cross under the North Pole in a submarine, but was able to prove that submarines were capable of operating beneath the polar ice cap, thereby paving the way for future successful missions. The US Navy later took his ashes to the North Pole aboard the submarine USS Skate on 17 March 1959.

Reading a little more about him, I discovered that wherever he went, even the Poles, he took his Urantia Book ! 

[Aquila King]

On 5/14/2019 at 9:59 PM, psyche101 said:

No animal in the fossil record just suddenly appears. 

I beg to differ. 

[Aquila King]

On 5/14/2019 at 11:38 PM, psyche101 said:

Do you now understand that punctuated equilibrium does not defy evolution and that it doesnt produce new species spontaneously? 

I've seen this debate within the scientific community, and never really knew where I stood on this topic. Out of curiosity, what's your position on this? 

Punctuated Equilibrium or Phyletc Gradualism?

[+DieChecker]

On 5/16/2019 at 12:03 PM, Aquila King said:

I beg to differ. 

Is that you, or Psyche? 

[onlookerofmayhem]

On 5/16/2019 at 3:03 PM, Aquila King said:

I beg to differ. 

 

11 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Is that you, or Psyche? 

I think it's @Mr Walker.

[danydandan]

9 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

 

I think it's @Mr Walker.

That the dude that wanted to beat up Joe Rogan. Good luck to him.

Joe would kick his head off.

[psyche101]

On 5/17/2019 at 5:07 AM, Aquila King said:

I've seen this debate within the scientific community, and never really knew where I stood on this topic. Out of curiosity, what's your position on this? 

Punctuated Equilibrium or Phyletc Gradualism?

Thanks for asking

I don't see a 'Vs' myself. Both are valid, both happen. Punctuated equilibrium is just a process sped up by environmental conditions. When more threatening circumstances appear, the minority that would normal mutate and outcompete others at a slower pace find themselves the majority as those unable to adapt die out, leaving the adapted species to reproduce at a rapid rate as the new mainstream population. I expect in many cases the species just go extinct. The Cambrian explosion has offered plentiful examples of this. It doesn't challenge or conflict with phyletic gradialism. 

[Will Due]

 

"The early stages of life evolution are not altogether in conformity with your present-day views. Mortal man is not an evolutionary accident. There is a precise system, a universal law, which determines the unfolding of the planetary life plan on the spheres of space. Time and the production of large numbers of a species are not the controlling influences. Mice reproduce much more rapidly than elephants, yet elephants evolve more rapidly than mice."

Link